User talk:Dmoon1

Archives
Archive 1 (Feb. 14, 2006 - Aug. 1, 2006)
Archive 2 (Aug. 3, 2006 - Jan. 5, 2007)

[edit] Cat and the Canary

I took a glance and I think the article is looking pretty good! I've added some quotes from a 1927 Variety review, and can possibly find a few other reviews to add; I'll do some searching over the weekend. I've also changed the status of the article from "Start" to "B".-Hal Raglan 02:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I was browsing your draft and from other posts in Wikipedia, I assumed you just...left. Sorry for swiping it and posting it with out asking. I'll be more careful next time. Andrzejbanas 13:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I was only too happy to nominate the article for GA - to be honest I assumed you would've done it sooner or later anyway. You're quite lucky it was promoted so quickly - I've seen some articles in the queue for 7-8 weeks. I notice when you're working on stuff as I have your "Draft" page on my Watchlist. I hope you get the article to whatever status you're hoping to achieve. LuciferMorgan 08:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I supported your FA for The Cat and the Canary. It's inspired me to attempt an article on another Leni film The Man Who Laughs. I'm an awful writer/researcher, but it beats a stub. Andrzejbanas 22:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK!

On 9 January 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Cat and the Canary (1927 film), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 22:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

By the way, great work with the article. =) Congratulations on getting it to GA status. Nishkid64 22:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hmm

looks like our old rivalry is back on again... though it looks like your cat is beating my Ogopogo so far. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 08:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Bet you were disappointed that I didn't object for lack of trivia. I'll never live that down will I? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 03:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Freaks

I noticed you're doing the film 'Freaks'. In terms of influence, I know that it influenced Marilyn Manson on one of his songs ('Doll Dagga Buzz Buzz Ziggedy Za' from his 5th album) where he sings "You're one of us" in the chorus. I'll see if I can find somewhere where he mentions this.

I think Stephen King touches upon the film too in 'Danse Macabre' so I'll dig it out for you. Also, I have another book on Gothic culture which mentions the film so I'll dig that out for you also.

By the way, you seem to choose iconic films in horror - perhaps you should consider being a horror critic? LuciferMorgan 09:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

What I remember best is a short film remake of Freaks I saw on ZeD- very, very well-done. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 23:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

No, it was different- a mix of everything from short films to artwork to animation to music to puppetry, and it ranged from comedy to drama. Some of the short films were by upstart Canadian artists, but the Freaks remake looked more professionally done, and may have come from somewhere else. I think it even had a big name. It was a creepy version where a teenage girl and her younger brother stumble into a circus on Halloween and the circus staff let the kid trick or treat there, with one stipulation- "For every treat you do not eat, you must give me a treat in return." He collects all these chocolate bars, thinking he'll have to return the ones he doesn't eat- but as it turns out the treats they want are his body parts, so to avoid dismembering he eats all of the chocolate and becomes hideously fat while the freaks chant out "One of us!" The freaks then turn to the girl and ask her if she wants to become a freak too, guessing she was secretly "titillated" by the world, but she humourously protests that "I'm cute!" and escapes. The description, but not the movie, is available here [1]. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 17:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Oops, my mistake, it is available there, it's the link at the bottom, Freakshow.mov. This appeared on TV during one of ZeD's Halloween specials- probably 2003. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 17:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autoblock

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): after careful review, it appears you are not a vandal. :P Request handled by: CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 22:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Dmoon1 05:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Cat and the Canary (1927 film)

I have left my comments on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Cat and the Canary (1927 film) in regards to reverting my work on the article. Mkdw^talk 16:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

response left on User's talk page; FAC; article's talk page. Dmoon1 17:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete sections of text or valid links from Wikipedia articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Langara College 21:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

response left on user's talk page Dmoon1 00:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on getting this article to FA. LuciferMorgan 00:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You're welcome and Citation Templates

You're welcome!

The only reason I suggested you use citation templates is because that is what I am familiar with. I personally think that they are a pain to use and severely clutter the edit field. I have been following the mess going on at the FAC page, and at the very least it has remained civil. This has not prevented the accusations of vandalism or page ownership.

I think the accusation of vandalism is especially inflammatory. Langara College knew he could not make it stick in public, so he hid it on your talk page and in template form no less! Vandalism is defined (as you and he know) as "intentionally making non-constructive edits" which is patently false on the intentional part and nearly as false on the non-constructive part (you could make the same claims about his edit), and thus you could make a case for him assuming bad faith.

However, you brought the page ownership claim on yourself when you used "sole author" (which you have since redacted), but obviously you are not acting like you own the page since you let other people make many changes. (Also if you felt you owned the article, you would have certainly taken umbrage at some of my PR suggestions.) Your opponents just seized on that phrase to deny your privilege to use your style while ignoring that you are the main contributor and thus it is still your privilege to have your preferred citation format style followed. If you want, I can make a much briefer statement of support at the FAC page (in which I can mention why I suggested cite templates in the PR). It's sad that the only thing holding this FA up is the citation formatting.--Supernumerary 02:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

It was wrong to make vandalism claims, and I'm not sure where the civility concerns are coming in, but still, I don't think it's worth getting worked up about; even if it's crufty, I don't know, it's with regard to the footnotes, and over-referencing is always preferable to under-referencing. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 17:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar! I will place it proudly on my homepage for all to see and admire.-Hal Raglan 18:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Star Wars characters

Yeah, that is a good idea. Then, as more characters get GA/FA, we can add to the list. — Deckiller 20:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Padme

Just a heads up that this user seems to want to put in his belief that she did not age at all. I reverted the article once, but I'm guessing he'll change it again. I'm not exactly sure where he came up with this, but it isn't sourced or believable. I saw that you were one of the major editors, so I figured you were the right one to tell. Cyrus Andiron 20:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Halloween

I just warned October Weather with {{uw-unsourced3}} after your most recent reversion. I'm really not sure about these templates however. I think this is vandalism under the circumstances, but most discussion of edits like his i've seen in the past has resulted in people saying it is a "just a content dispute" despite the circumstances. Nevertheless, it might be useful to take this to WP:AIAV if the material is added again.--Fuhghettaboutit 03:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your deleting of legitimate edits and calling them "nonsense"

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to Padmé Amidala. If you continue to do so, it may be considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --24.235.229.208 03:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Messages left on anonymous user's talk page who IS adding nonsense to articles. Dmoon1 03:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

It isn't nonsense or original reaserch when it is something obvious to a casual viewer. If you think that Wikipedia should say something different, you should mention it in the article with references to give our readers a clearer understanding of the topic. Many readers will be confused about her age and may come to Wikipedia to figure out what was going on. If what you say is true, and her ages were 14 and 24 respectively, by all means add a line explaining it. But the article has to say something about her age to be complete and helpful to everyone. --24.235.229.208 04:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The article already addresses this, if you bothered to actually read it. Dmoon1 18:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:Films Newsletter

The January 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Nehrams2020 07:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autoblock

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 66.110.197.20 lifted or expired. Request handled by: Yamla 14:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autoblock

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 66.110.197.20 lifted or expired. Request handled by: Yamla 22:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Correction to articlehistory template

Just wanted to let you know that the {{ArticleHistory}} template you installed at Talk:Max Rebo Band was returning an error; I corrected it. Candidates are not added to the history until they are either promoted or failed, and then the closing date is the date and oldid used. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:MaximumOverdrivePoster.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:MaximumOverdrivePoster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 20:23, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nigel Kneale

Hello. I notice that you have done a lot of work on the article for Halloween III: Season of the Witch, and as he's connected to that film I wondered whether there was any chance you had the time to take a look at the article on Nigel Kneale? I've done a lot of work on it recently and currently have a peer review request up for it, with the aim of hopefully taking it to FAC. Any comments you might have that would help improve it to FAC readiness would be very gratefully received. Many thanks. Angmering 22:50, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Films February Newsletter

The February 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Cbrown1023 talk 22:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:NOTLD

It's no worries, I wasn't taking it to heart. I like the original FAC version, not because it's "shorter" but because it's more streamlined.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review

The article on ZeD is on peer review, I was telling you about it earlier, you asked me what the show was indicating the article itself was unhelpful. Wondering what you think now. Thanks, CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 23:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] March WP:FILMS Newsletter

The March 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated notice by BrownBot 00:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)